GENERIC INFORMATION NEEDS FOR 

 MARINE POLLUTION MANAGEMENT DECISIONS 



In the context of the marine pollution management decision process, there 

 is a great extent of commonality among most marine pollution issues and the 

 information needs required to address them. For each of the major issues 

 related to marine pollution, the types of management alternatives are few (table 

 1), although in any particular situation, of course, these alternatives will be 

 expressed in terms of the specific engineering practices, disposal location, 

 regulatory stipulations, etc., most applicable to the contaminants or insults 

 of that situation. Similarly, the marine resource values potentially at risk 

 from the resultant pollution are essentially the same for all issues (tables 2 

 and 3), even though details of use patterns, habitat characteristics, and species 

 compositions may vary greatly from one situation to the next. Regardless of 

 these differences, however, both the measures of outcome for the resources at 

 risk (table 2) and the mechanisms of pollution impact (table 3) will be fairly 

 consistent from one situation to the next. The overall assessment of marine 

 pollution management alternatives requires that the expected value be computed 

 for each of the probable outcomes (expressed in the measures of table 2) that 

 are predicted for each of the alternatives under consideration. This generic 

 prediction problem involves two major (and extremely complex) tasks: 



1) Predicting the Outcomes , i.e., predicting the magnitudes, spatial 

 scales, and durations of change In the measures of outcome (table 3) 

 for each class of resource values for each identified management 

 alternative. This predictive effort must consider all the relevant 

 mechanisms of impact (table 3) and all the relevant stochastic events 

 which may cause different outcomes. 



2) Evaluating the Outcomes , i.e., establishing the actual or relative 

 value of each outcome as a function of the measures in table 3, and 

 the spatial scales and duration of impact. These marine resource 

 values must be considered along with the other socio-economic values 

 associated with each management option, so that the optimal alternative 

 can be identified. These valuation approaches are likely to differ 

 from region to region, depending upon the experience, preferences, and 

 circumstances of the decisionmaker and the population affected by the 

 decision. Thus, optimal management alternatives will be different for 

 similar problems at different times and places. 



Efforts to date on resource evaluation have met with little success, 

 especially for nonmarket values, such as long-term global human habitat, 

 ecological or wilderness esthetic values, and birds and endangered species 

 (Mattson 1979). By contrast, valuation of commercial fish and shellfish, 

 including discounting approaches for future yields (Clark 1976), is reasonably 

 well established; and approaches for valuing human health (Howard 1979, North 

 and Merkhofer 1976, Kates 1978) and recreational values (Wilman 1978, Bonnieux 

 et al. 1980) are proceeding on several fronts related to other decision problems. 

 Matheson and Howard (1968) note that "though these questions of evaluation may 

 be difficult, logic demands that they be approached directly in monetary terms 

 if monetary resources are to be allocated." The Willingness-to-Pay approach is 

 one way of approaching the monetary value of outcomes and has the virtue of 

 simplicity compared with utility assignments, which may be very complex indeed 



